Written Answers Thursday 9 March 2006

Scottish Executive

Cancer

Mrs Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive what plans there are to monitor the experience reported by men with prostate cancer.

Mrs Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive what steps are being taken to ensure that the experience of treatment and care reported by men with prostate cancer is at the level of that reported by patients with other cancers.

Mr Andy Kerr: The views of all patients with cancer including those with prostate cancer are fundamental to the design, delivery and development of cancer services. Patient Involvement Workers have been working in the North, South East and West of Scotland Cancer Networks to develop sustainable models of involving patients in the design and delivery of cancer services in their region.

  Patients are also members of the Scottish Cancer Group and its sub-groups and working groups advising on their needs and the changes needed to meet them. Patient members act as channels for communicating ideas and views from other patients and groups across the country.

  In addition the Cancer Care Research Centre, University of Stirling is undertaking a three-year programme of work funded by the department (April 2004 to March 2007) that aims to provide models of good practice in gathering patient experience and promoting patient involvement.

  Seeking the views and experiences of all NHSScotland patients with a view to improving services is also a fundamental part of the Patient Focus and Public Involvement programme of work being undertaken by NHSScotland. This approach to the development of responsive local services is now underpinned by the statutory duty of public involvement placed on NHS boards by the NHS Reform (Scotland) Act 2004. All NHS boards have a designated Director for Patient Focus and Public Involvement with responsibility for driving this culture into every aspect of local health services.

  The Scottish Health Council will monitor NHS boards Patient Focus and Public Involvement activities which will include how they use the experiences of patients to inform future service development and delivery.

Cancer

Mrs Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how many men were diagnosed with prostate cancer in each NHS board area in the last year for which data is available.

Mr Andy Kerr: Information on the number of men diagnosed with prostate cancer by NHS board area and year (1980 to 2002) is available on the Information Services Division website at: http://www.isdscotland.org/isd/files/cancer_prostate_inc_m.xls .

Cancer

Mrs Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive what steps are being taken to ensure that prostate cancer patients can expect the same levels of treatment and care from each NHS board.

Mr Andy Kerr: Cancer in Scotland: Action for change published in 2001 recognised that managed cancer networks, bringing together all of the professions and disciplines involved in the care of patients with a particular cancer type, help ensure that the best possible quality of care is provided equitably across a geographical area.

  Regional cancer networks are in place in the North of Scotland (NOSCAN), South East of Scotland (SCAN) and in the West of Scotland (WOSCAN). Each of these regional networks includes tumour specific multi-disciplinary teams, such as those specialising in urological cancers.

  NHS Quality Improvement Scotland (NHS QIS) is responsible for setting standards for clinical care, assessing performance throughout NHSScotland against these standards, and publishing the findings. As far as cancer is concerned NHS QIS has recently set up a Steering Group to review and revise existing standards, identify core elements of cancer services and look at the possible development of new tumour specific cancer standards.

Cancer

Mrs Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive what improvements there have been to prostate cancer services as a result of the Cancer Service Improvement Programme.

Mr Andy Kerr: The Cancer Service Improvement Programme (CSIP) identified a number of high impact changes across cancer clinical pathways. The Top 20 Actions for Change  are available from the Centre for Change and Innovation website at: http://www.cci.scot.nhs.uk/cci/files/CSIP%20Top%2020%20Actions%20for%20Change%20FINAL.pdf .

  The programme has worked with urological multi-disciplinary teams across the three regional cancer networks supporting implementation of the Top 20 Actions for Change and enabling clinical teams to make sustainable changes. For example:

  In Oban the provision of patient information at first consultation and the development of a rapid test reporting system means that patients and carers are now better informed about treatment options and the waiting time to diagnosis has been reduced.

  In Grampian nurse led co-ordination of prostate referrals onto a common biopsy list to maximise the use of available slots has reduced time to biopsy by three weeks.

Cancer

Mrs Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive what assessment it has made of the Department of Health’s Prostate Cancer Advisory Group’s decision to authorise a pilot public awareness campaign in England on the prostate and its function.

Mrs Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it plans to launch a public awareness campaign in Scotland on the prostate and its function.

Mr Andy Kerr: The pilot campaign, announced on 31 October 2005, is intended to raise awareness of the prostate and its function and will take place in one NHS Primary Care Trust area in England. There will be an evaluation of the impact the pilot has on the local population and its effect on NHS services.

  The Scottish Executive is represented on the Department of Health’s Prostate Cancer Advisory Group and will review the results from the evaluation of this pilot once these are available.

Cancer

Mrs Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive what mechanisms are in place to ensure that information and advice on prostate cancer services are equally accessible to all men, regardless of their ethnic background.

Mr Andy Kerr: Fair for All - The Wider Challenge  sets out how NHS boards are expected to deliver services for individuals, responsive to their life circumstances and taking into account their needs in relation to information and services. The Scottish Health Council are quality assuring NHS boards’ Patient Focus Public Involvement (PFPI) activity and this assessment will include monitoring progress against Fair for All - The Wider Challenge.

  Equality Impact Assessment guidance (HDL 2005 (9)) has been introduced across NHSScotland, with the expectation that all new and existing functions and policies will be assessed to identify and address any potential negative impact for individuals and communities.

  NHS boards will be establishing a strategic partnership with a consortium of local Citizen’s Advice Bureaux to commission an Independent Advice and Support Service for NHS users, carers and the public as set out in HDL (2006) 13. This service will develop to include provision of information, advice and support needed by individuals to manage and take control of their own care.

  Cancer in Scotland: Action for change – A Guide to securing access to information, published in 2003, recognised that people affected by cancer should have access to relevant information at a time and in a form appropriate to them and sets out the direction for cancer services in a broader context.

Cancer

Mrs Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive what assessment it has made of the calls made by the Prostate Cancer Charter for Action, as relaunched in October 2005.

Mr Andy Kerr: The current position in response to Prostate Cancer Charter for Action’s four priorities is as follows:

  Resources

  Cancer in Scotland: Action for change was published in 2001 backed by a significant new recurring investment of £25 million. This money is for all cancer services and benefits all people with cancer of any type. Over £700,000 was targeted at prostate/urological cancers through the provision of a biopsy service, equipment such as ultrasound scanners and cystoscopes, specialist nurses, staff for brachytherapy services and audit staff for quality assurance of services.

  Patient Care

  NHS Quality Improvement Scotland is responsible for setting standards for clinical care, assessing performance throughout NHSScotland against these standards, and publishing the findings. As far as cancer is concerned NHS QIS has recently set up a steering group to review and revise existing standards, identify core elements of cancer services and look at the possible development of new tumour specific cancer standards.

  A report on prostate cancer services was prepared in 2002 setting out options for the future management of prostate cancer. Regional Cancer Advisory Groups and NHS Chief Executives were asked to consider this report when looking at options for the future management of prostate cancer. Tumour specific multi-disciplinary teams, including those for urological cancers, are now in place across Scotland.

  Transparency

  There is a national data set for prostate cancer in Scotland and data is routinely collected in most places. Urological cancer waiting times and detailed information on all aspects of Scotland’s cancer strategy are available from the Scottish Executive website at: www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Health/health/cancer/intro.

  Public Awareness

  The Scottish Executive is represented on the Department of Health’s Prostate Cancer Advisory Group and will review the results from the evaluation of their pilot campaign to raise awareness of the prostate and its function once these are available.

Child Care

Alex Neil (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to assist parents with child care costs.

Robert Brown: The main direct forms of support for parents with child care costs are the tax credits system and child care vouchers. These are both the responsibility of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) and are reserved matters.

  Childcare Strategy funding of over £43 million has been passed to local authorities to meet the Executive’s aim of providing good quality, accessible and affordable childcare in all areas of Scotland. This funding supports a wide range of child care projects and can include providing or subsidising child care places where this is seen as a priority. Similarly, SureStart Scotland funding is used by local authorities to provide services for vulnerable families, which may include child care provision.

  The Working for Families (WFF) initiative, being operated in selected parts of Scotland, supports parents in deprived areas to progress towards or into employment. This can include help to tackle the financial barriers associated with child care, for example by providing the full cost of a child care place for a short time-limited period whilst the parent makes the transition into employment.

Child Care

Alex Neil (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what the average cost is, per family, of child care.

Robert Brown: The average cost, per family, of child care is not known for Scotland in 2006. In 2003-04 a survey of parents in Scotland conducted for the Executive revealed that 63 per cent of families with children do not pay for child care, relying on informal care and free provision. Of those families that did pay for child care, 38 per cent paid less than £20 per week, 18 per cent paid between £20 and £39 per week, 18 per cent paid between £40 and £70 per week, 10 per cent paid between £71 and £100 per week, 8 per cent paid more than £100 per week, 1 per cent make a one off payment and 7 per cent was not stated. These costs are per family for up to two children.

Community Planning

Jim Mather (Highlands and Islands) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what aspect of the Accounts Commission’s report, Argyll and Bute Council: The Audit of Best Value and Community Planning , gave the Scottish Executive most concern and what action it will take to address the situation.

Mr Tom McCabe: I wrote to the Council Leader, Allan MacAskill on 14 February following publication of the Best Value Audit of Argyll and Bute Council, noting my concern that the report describes a council lacking clear corporate leadership to drive change and promote a culture of challenge and improvement, and with insufficient focus at a corporate level on the needs of service users.

  I have encouraged the council to work closely with the Improvement Service in addressing the Accounts Commission’s findings. The Improvement Service was established in 2005 in partnership between COSLA, SOLACE and the Scottish Executive, to work with Scottish councils, their partners and stakeholders to improve the efficiency, quality and accountability of public services across Scotland. This includes assisting and supporting local authorities in taking forward their Improvement Plans as agreed with the Accounts Commission following a Best Value Audit.

  The Improvement Service has already made contact with Argyll and Bute Council to ascertain the nature and level of support needed.

  I am grateful to Mr Mather for giving me the opportunity once again to bring these matters to light.

Community Planning

Elaine Smith (Coatbridge and Chryston) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive how many Community Planning Partnerships will receive additional funding in (a) 2006-07 and (b) 2007-08 for the mainstreaming of New Futures Fund projects.

Elaine Smith (Coatbridge and Chryston) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive how much each Community Planning Partnership will receive in additional funding in (a) 2006-07 and (b) 2007-08 for the mainstreaming of New Futures Fund projects and what general requirements will be placed on the receipt of this funding.

Allan Wilson: The funding for the mainstreaming of New Futures Fund (NFF) will be allocated to Community Planning Partnerships (CPPs) that have NFF projects in their areas. The allocations are outlined in the table below. We are in discussion with some CPPs to finalise funding arrangements as a number of the existing projects provide services into two partnership areas. By the end of September, CPPs will be required to provide plans for developing employability services for those people furthest from the labour market, building on NFF projects where appropriate.

  

 Local Authority
 Allocation for 2006-07 and 2007-08


 Aberdeen City
£219,000


 Aberdeenshire
£25,000


 Dumfries and Galloway
£210,000


 Dundee
£89,000


 East Lothian
£42,500


 Midlothian
£42,500


 East Renfrewshire and Renfrewshire
£79,000


 East Ayrshire
£30,000


 Edinburgh
£296,000


 Falkirk
£49,000


 Fife
£131,000


 Glasgow
£1,094,000


 Inverclyde
£70,000


 North Lanarkshire
£277,000


 Perth and Kinross
£148,000


 South Ayrshire
£186,000


 South Lanarkshire
£69,000


 West Dunbartonshire
£95,000

Concessionary Travel

Trish Godman (West Renfrewshire) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive when it will announce a concessionary travel scheme for young people.

Tavish Scott: We are currently developing detailed proposals to implement the Partnership Agreement Commitment to introduce a national scheme of concessionary travel for young people. I will make an announcement once the proposals are finalised.

Crown Estate

John Farquhar Munro (Ross, Skye and Inverness West) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive whether Scottish Ministers have, under the terms of the Scotland Act 1998, any powers over property held in Scotland by the Crown Estate and, if so, whether these powers include the ability to transfer ownership of land held in right of the Crown by the Crown Estate.

Ross Finnie: I refer the member to the answers to questions S2W-22827 and S2W-22828 on 28 February 2006. All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can be found at: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/webapp/wa.search .

Crown Estate

John Farquhar Munro (Ross, Skye and Inverness West) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive whether the Transfer of Property etc. (Scottish Ministers) Order 1999 allows Scottish ministers to transfer the ownership of Crown Estate property in Scotland.

Ross Finnie: The Transfer of Property etc (Scottish Ministers) Order 1999 , a copy of which is available in the Scottish Parliament Information Centre (Bib. number 30829), provides for the transfer of certain property and liabilities of Ministers of the Crown and government departments to the Scottish ministers in connection with the transfer to them of functions under the Scotland Act 1998. It does not provide for the Scottish ministers to transfer ownership of Crown Estate property in Scotland.

Defence

Brian Adam (Aberdeen North) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has had any discussions with UK ministers in respect of the procedures for investigating deaths of Scottish soldiers serving with Scottish regiments outwith the United Kingdom.

Mr Tom McCabe: The Scottish Executive has not held any discussions with the UK Government regarding the deaths of Scottish soldiers serving in Scottish regiments outwith the United Kingdom.

Defence

Brian Adam (Aberdeen North) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has offered access to the Scottish legal system and forensic pathology services to investigate the circumstances in respect of the deaths of Scottish soldiers serving with Scottish regiments outwith the United Kingdom.

Mr Tom McCabe: The Scottish Executive has not offered access to the Scottish legal and forensic pathology services in relation to the deaths of Scottish soldiers overseas.

Dentistry

Ms Rosemary Byrne (South of Scotland) (SSP): To ask the Scottish Executive how many dentists recruited from overseas are currently working in each NHS board area.

Lewis Macdonald: I refer the member to the answer to question S2W-23432 on 8 March 2006.

Diabetes

Mrs Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has met its pledge that all diabetes patients would have access to screening by March 2006 and whether it will provide a breakdown of any relevant statistics.

Mr Andy Kerr: Following a successful pilot in Lothian, a national, quality assured, digital photography based diabetic screening programme is being rolled out in March 2006. During the course of the next year, all people with diabetes in Scotland will be offered an opportunity to have their eyes screened for retinopathy, and this will continue on an annual basis.

  The new programme will increase the quality, consistency and capacity of existing retinopathy screening services. It will reduce preventable blindness.

Drug Misuse

Mr Frank McAveety (Glasgow Shettleston) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what level of resources it provides to Glasgow City Council to deal with children in families with drug addiction.

Hugh Henry: There are several Executive funding programmes which benefit children and families with drugs problems.

  Glasgow City Council will receive almost £10 million in 2006-07 from the Changing Children’s Services Fund which is intended to improve integration of services for the most vulnerable children and young people, including those who are affected by substance misuse problems. The Sure Start programme supports vulnerable families with very young children in areas of greatest need and resources allocated to the Council amount to £8.8 million in 2006-07.

  I also refer the member to the answer to question S2W-23047 on 9 March, which details the resources provided to Glasgow City Council for drug misuse, and to Greater Glasgow NHS Board for drug treatment and care services. At the discretion of the council and the board, some of this funding will be used to address the needs of children and young people affected by their own or their parents’ drug problems. Children and families with substance misuse problems will also be supported from wider education and social work programmes which are incorporated within the core local government settlement.

Drug Misuse

Mr Frank McAveety (Glasgow Shettleston) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what percentage of drug misuse in Scotland is located within the Glasgow City Council area.

Hugh Henry: A study by the Centre for Drug Misuse research at the University of Glasgow and the Scottish Centre for Infection and Environmental Health estimated the prevalence of problematic (opiate and benzodiazapine) drug use in Scotland in 2003. Of the estimated 51,582 problem drug users, about 22% were estimated to have been resident in Glasgow. Full details are available at http://www.drugmisuse.isdscotland.org/publications/local/prevreport2004.pdf .

  Information from the Scottish Drug Misuse Database shows that in 2004/2005, 19% of those coming into drug treatment in Scotland were resident in Glasgow. Full details are available at: http://www.drugmisuse.isdscotland.org/publications/05dmss/05dmss.htm.

Drug Misuse

Mr Frank McAveety (Glasgow Shettleston) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what percentage of funding to address drug misuse has been allocated to Glasgow City Council and what plans it has to increase this share.

Hugh Henry: The following funding was allocated to Glasgow City Council in 2005-06 to tackle drug misuse directly.

  £253,175 for arrest referral, this is 44% of the total arrest referral allocation of £581,176.

  £350,733 for Drug Treatment and Testing Orders which is 5.5% of the total of £6,320,422.

  £1,347,408 for drug courts which is 64.9% of the total of £2,074,869

  £1,736,863 for the Timeout Centre which represents 100% funding for this one off project.

  In addition to the above Greater Glasgow NHS Board receives £6,392,277 per annum for drug treatment and care services. This represents 27% of the total £23.7 million per annum allocated in Scotland. It also receives £135,570 to support the work of the Drug Action Team. This represents 9% of the £1.5 million per annum provided nationally.

  In addition to these earmarked resources, considerable funding is allocated from other Executive funding streams, including Changing Children’s Services Fund, SureStart, etc for drug related activities referred to the answer to question S2W-23045 on 9 March.

Drug Misuse

Mr Frank McAveety (Glasgow Shettleston) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what action it is taking to ensure that sheriffs are aware of their responsibilities when determining the future of children with parents who are drug addicts.

Hugh Henry: Sheriffs are independent of the Executive and I have no doubt they take seriously their responsibilities for determining the future of children of inadequate parents. The Judicial Studies Committee, which is funded by my department, offers training on these matters to newly appointed and experienced sheriffs.

Drug Misuse

Mr Frank McAveety (Glasgow Shettleston) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it intends to review inter-agency procedures to ensure that all agencies share information and minimise any future risk to children, following recent reports of an 11-year-old girl involved in serious drug misuse.

Hugh Henry: Getting Our Priorities Right - Good Practice Guidance for working with Children and Families affected by Substance Misuse  published by the Executive in 2003 provided a clear framework for practitioners and service providers on working with families where there is substance misuse. This makes it clear that if a child may be at risk of harm this will always override a professional or agency requirement to keep information confidential. Professionals have a responsibility to act to make sure that a child whose safety or welfare may be at risk is protected from harm.

  Protecting Children and Young People: Framework for Standards published in 2004 reinforced this requiring agencies and professionals to share information about children where this is necessary to protect them.

  The Getting it Right for Every Child (Bib. number 37081) proposed that all agencies involved with children work to a single assessment, record and plan for each child. Based on this shared information, agencies will be expected to take action which is appropriate, proportionate and timely to address the needs of the child. We will also shortly be publishing an action plan in response to the issues raised in Hidden Harm, responding to the needs of children of problem drug users.

  However, recognising the need to strengthen guidance still further, the First Minister announced on 25 February that legislation requiring agencies to share information will be introduced and that all social workers and other frontline professionals will be retrained in child protection over the next two years.

Education

Dr Jean Turner (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (Ind): To ask the Scottish Executive what the plans are for teaching history as a discrete subject at S1 and S2.

Peter Peacock: The on-going curriculum review, A Curriculum for Excellence, is considering all aspects of the curriculum to ensure that they contribute to enabling young people to develop the four capacities of successful learners, confident individuals, responsible citizens and effective contributors. I envisage history will always be taught in S1 and S2.

Environment

Robin Harper (Lothians) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive which local authorities have commenced greenspace audits.

Johann Lamont: This information is not held centrally. However, as part of independent research part-funded by the Executive on Minimum Standards for Open Space, researchers contacted all Scottish local authorities seeking information on progress towards the preparation of open space audits and strategies. As of August 2004 the following local authorities indicated that they had begun preparation or completed an open space audit for all or part of their district.

  Aberdeen City Angus City of Edinburgh Dundee City East Dunbartonshire East Lothian East Renfrewshire Falkirk Glasgow City Highland Inverclyde Midlothian Moray North Lanarkshire Perth and Kinross Renfrewshire Scottish Borders Shetland Isles West Lothian.

  In addition, we understand that the following local authorities have commenced or completed work on an open space strategy.

  Aberdeenshire South Ayrshire.

  A copy of the research report Minimum Standards for Open Space is available from the Scottish Parliament Information Centre (Bib. number 37111).

Fire Service

Carolyn Leckie (Central Scotland) (SSP): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will agree to meet representatives of the Fire Brigades Union to discuss pensions.

Hugh Henry: I have no plans to meet with the Fire Brigades Union to discuss pensions.

  These matters are being actively considered by the Firefighters’ Pension Committee, membership of which includes both the Fire Brigades Union and the Scottish Executive.

Health

Mrs Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether analysers for troponin testing for cardiac disease are used in the NHS.

Mr Andy Kerr: Analysers are available for use in NHSScotland.

Health

Mrs Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether any NHS boards are in contact with Dade Behring to discuss the application of its approach to improving the availability of troponin testing throughout the United Kingdom.

Mr Andy Kerr: This is a matter for NHS boards.

Health

Mary Scanlon (Highlands and Islands) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive which managed clinical networks are planned for future development, in accordance with its circular, HDL (2002) 69.

Mr Andy Kerr: As Delivering for Health makes clear, we will be producing new guidance aimed in general at strengthening the authority of Managed Clinical Networks (MCN) and increasing their influence on the way in which resources are allocated for services. A key aspect of that approach will be to ensure that MCNs are fully integrated into NHS boards’ planning processes at local, regional or national level. Future Networks will therefore be aimed at addressing a need which is considered to be a priority at each of these levels.

Health

Mary Scanlon (Highlands and Islands) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether managed clinical networks have ensured equitable provision of, and equitable access to, high quality, clinically effective services throughout Scotland.

Mr Andy Kerr: Equity of provision of and access to services is one of the fundamental aims of all Managed Clinical Networks (MCN). The national networks are able to promote this aim for patients regardless of where in Scotland they are resident.

  Where there are networks in each board associated with a national strategy, the fact that they are all working to the same evidence base helps promote equity of access to high quality, clinically effective services. The regular meetings of MCN Lead Clinicians, as part of the implementation of the national strategies, provides a mechanism for identifying and addressing any issues relating to equity of access.

Health

Mary Scanlon (Highlands and Islands) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether managed clinical networks are effective in delivering care in a local context.

Mr Andy Kerr: The Managed Clinical Networks for cardiac services, stroke, cancer and diabetes are showing their effectiveness in taking forward the local implementation of our national strategies for each of these conditions. The gains at present are largely in terms of the integration of services through re-design.

  Assessing improvements in outcomes is a longer term aim. The indications are, however, that the cardiac MCNs are contributing to reductions in mortality associated with coronary heart disease, while the priority which the stroke MCNs have given to the development of stroke units is based on the evidence of improved outcomes resulting from treatment in such units.

Housing

Murray Tosh (West of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how many houses were built with funding from Scottish Homes or Communities Scotland in each year since 1997-98 for (a) all forms of shared ownership, (b) private rented housing and (c) owner-occupied housing where the houses came under its definition of affordable housing.

Malcolm Chisholm: I have asked Angiolina Foster, Chief Executive of Communities Scotland, to respond. Her response is as follows:

  The number of houses approved with funding from Scottish Homes or Communities Scotland in each year since 1997-98 for (a) all forms of shared ownership, (b) private rented housing and (c) owner-occupied housing where the houses came under our definition of affordable housing is as follows:

  

 Year
 Shared Ownership
 Private Rented
 Owner Occupation


 1997-98
 668
 35
 1,436


 1998-99
 549
 112
 1,602


 1999-2000
 301
 82
 1,867


 2000-01
 193
 109
 941


 2001-02
 318
 104
 56


 2002-03
 76
 93
 539


 2003-04
 360
 75
 865


 2004-05
 273
 41
 471


 2005-06*
 579
 36
 378



  Note: *Figures for 2005/06 are not yet available. Table includes agreed targets.

Housing

Elaine Smith (Coatbridge and Chryston) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what the national average monthly rent is for a housing association two-apartment house.

Malcolm Chisholm: I have asked Angiolina Foster, Chief Executive of Communities Scotland, to respond. Her response is as follows:

  The latest available statistics for Registered Social Landlords (2004-05) show that the national average monthly rent for a two-apartment dwelling, let as a Scottish Secure Tenancy in 2005, was £188.07.

Justice

Sarah Boyack (Edinburgh Central) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it believes that the prosecution service is equipped to deal with complex cases.

Elish Angiolini QC: I am confident that the professional and dedicated staff within the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service have the appropriate expertise and are well equipped to deal effectively with complex cases. This was highlighted recently in the successful prosecution of Transco, which led to the imposition of a fine of £15 million - the highest fine ever imposed by a court in this country.

Justice

Cathie Craigie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what further action will be taken to recover unpaid fines.

Cathy Jamieson: Last week we announced reforms to the system of fines enforcement as part of our package of summary justice reform. These include the introduction of dedicated fines enforcement officers, who will take effective action against those who can pay their fine but refuse to do so. They will also provide advice and information to those who want to pay, but are genuinely struggling to do so.

Marine Environment

Richard Lochhead (North East Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions it has had with the UK Government regarding the 14 areas in Scotland recently named as marine environment high risk areas.

Rhona Brankin: The Scottish Executive is in regular contact with Her Majesty’s Government on a number of issues, including the process whereby a number of coastal areas in Scotland were recently designated as marine environmental high risk areas.

Marine Environment

Mr Mark Ruskell (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it is the authority from whom a licence must be sought for works in respect of the proposed commercial ship-to-ship crude oil transfer in the Firth of Forth which will affect European Protected Species under the Habitats Directive.

Mr Mark Ruskell (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive whether a licence for ship-to-ship crude oil transfer affecting European Protected Species under the Habitats Directive applies to the species and their shelters and breeding places, whether or not the species are present in these places.

Rhona Brankin: The Scottish Executive does not issue licences specifically for ship-to-ship transfer of crude oil.

  If it were to be established that the proposed commercial ship-to-ship transfer of crude oil were likely to disturb a European Protected Species, or damage or destroy its breeding site or resting place, whether or not the species is present in these places, a licence would be required from the licensing authority under regulation 44 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Regulations 1994. In that case, the licensing authority would be the Scottish Executive. The advice I have sought from Scottish Natural Heritage in respect of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency’s consultation on the relevant oil spill contingency plan will enable decisions to be taken about whether a licence might be necessary and I do not want to prejudge the outcome of that consideration.

Marine Environment

Mr Mark Ruskell (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive whether consideration of European Protected Species must be included as part of an oil spill contingency plan approval process.

Mr Mark Ruskell (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive whether an oil spill contingency plan approved without due consideration to European Protected Species would breach European directives.

Rhona Brankin: The approval of oil spill contingency plans is a matter for the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) acting on behalf of the Secretary of State for Transport.

  As a competent authority under the EU Habitats Directive the MCA must have regard to the requirements of the Directive where appropriate in the exercise of their functions. It is understood that as part of the consultation process on ship-to-ship transfer in the Firth of Forth the MCA will give due consideration to nature conservation issues.

Marine Environment

Mr Mark Ruskell (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive whether an environmental impact assessment (EIA) has been produced in respect of proposed commercial oil spill contingency plans for ship-to-ship transfer of oil in the Firth of Forth and whether any such EIA has been undertaken voluntarily or under statute.

Rhona Brankin: I am aware that the Maritime and Coastguard Agency included the member in the list of consultees sent details of the consultation exercise which commenced on 16 February. The member will therefore be aware that an environmental impact assessment (EIA) is one of the documents forming part of the consultation. The status of such an assessment as part of the oil spill planning process is a matter for Her Majesty’s Government but I understand that an EIA is not a formal requirement of the relevant legislation, which is the Merchant Shipping (Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation Convention) Regulations 1998.

Marine Environment

Mr Mark Ruskell (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive whether methods and mitigation measures suggested as a result of an environmental impact assessment undertaken voluntarily in respect of proposed commercial ship-to-ship transfer of oil in the Firth of Forth can be enforced by law.

Mr Mark Ruskell (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive what mechanism exists for the enforcement of methods and mitigation measures that result from the consultation on the oil spill contingency plan for commercial ship-to-ship transfer of oil in the Firth of Forth.

Rhona Brankin: Methods and mitigation measures suggested as a result of the consultation exercise, including those suggested as part of any environmental impact assessment, will be taken into account before the relevant oil spill contingency plan is approved. Once the plan is approved, it will be enforceable under the Merchant Shipping (Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation Convention) Regulations 1998 which are the responsibility of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency.

Marine Environment

Mr Mark Ruskell (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive what the role of Scottish ministers is in respect of the public consultation on the oil spill contingency plan for commercial ship-to-ship transfer of oil in the Firth of Forth.

Rhona Brankin: The Scottish Executive will respond to the consultation having taken advice from Scottish Natural Heritage on the potential environmental implications of the oil spill contingency plan, in particular the potential impacts on Special Protection Areas and Special Areas of Conservation designated by Scottish ministers under the Conservation (Natural Habitats etc) Regulations 1994 and bearing in mind our obligations in respect of European Protected Species.

Marine Environment

Mr Mark Ruskell (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive why advice has been sought from Scottish Natural Heritage in respect of the oil spill contingency plan for commercial ship-to-ship transfer of oil in the Firth of Forth and for what purpose.

Rhona Brankin: The role of Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) includes the provision of advice to the Scottish Executive on natural heritage matters and issues likely to affect the environment of Scotland. I have consequently asked SNH for advice in respect of the oil spill contingency plan to help inform any response the Scottish Executive may make to the recently announced public consultation.

Meat Industry

Richard Lochhead (North East Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what progress has been made towards ending the beef export ban.

Ross Finnie: The EU Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health voted unanimously to lift the beef export ban at its meeting on 8 March. The European Commission will need to follow its usual procedures to give legal effect to this decision. Export activity is expected to resume around the end of April.

NHS Waiting Times

Mrs Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive, following the publication of Scottish Health Statistics – Acute Hospital Care on 23 February 2006, what the baseline figure is in respect of 89.9% of out-patients being seen within 26 weeks in the quarter ending as at December 2005.

Mr Andy Kerr: The figure quoted was calculated from SMR00 (out-patient return) data records provided by all NHS boards in respect of patients who attended for new out-patient appointments at NHS clinics taken or led by consultants in acute specialties between 1 October 2005 and 31 December 2005. These returns allow calculation of the waiting time experienced by these patients. It is calculated as the time elapsed between the date each patient’s referral letter from a general medical or dental practitioner was received at the hospital and the date of their out-patient appointment. The records of patients who have an Availability Status Codes (ASC) are not included in the calculation. ASCs record circumstances where the out-patient waiting time target does not apply (because, for example, the patient asks to delay an appointment, fails to attend and is offered another appointment, or refuses a reasonable offer of an appointment). At the time of the publication for the quarter in question, Boards had submitted 190,632 SMR00 returns for new out-patient attendances in acute specialties where the patient did not have an ASC. Of these 171,294 (or 89.9%) recorded a wait of 26 weeks or less.

  Additional SMR00 records relating to the quarter ended 31 December submitted by boards after the closure of the file for the publication of statistics on 23 February 2006 will be included in future routine analyses and updates of the website. The figures published on 23 February are therefore provisional (as the web pages make clear).

  The SMR00 returns for the quarter ended 31 December 2005 do not record the number of patients who, on that date, were waiting more than 26 weeks for a new out-patient appointment. A separate census of patients waiting at the quarter end date is taken and published. This is referred to as the out-patient waiting list (OPWL) census. The OPWL census allows calculation of waiting times from receipt of referral letter at the hospital to the census date. The OPWL census for 31 December 2005 showed that, of patients who were waiting at that date and who were covered by the out-patient waiting times target (that is, patients who did not have ASCs), two were waiting more than 26 weeks. These cases were the result of administrative errors. They were seen at out-patient clinics as soon as the errors were discovered.

  The NHS in Scotland and Information Services Division of NHS National Services Scotland (ISD Scotland) have checking systems in place to try to eliminate recording errors from waiting times data. However it is possible that a small proportion of data recording errors are made and included in the statistics, including errors relating to the calculation of waiting times.

NHS Waiting Times

Mrs Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how many out-patients were treated within 26 weeks from GP referral in each quarter in each of the last five years, expressed also as a percentage of the total number of out-patients.

Mr Andy Kerr: Centrally held information can provide details of general medical and dental practitioner (GP) referrals to consultant out-patient clinics and the time elapsed to the first out-patient appointment.

  The following table details the number and percentage of appointments within 26 weeks of referral* by a GP, for each quarter up to and including December 2005.

  The information excludes patients who have an Availability Status Codes (ASC). ASCs record circumstances where the out-patient waiting time target does not apply (because, for example, the patient asks to delay an appointment, fails to attend and is offered another appointment, or refuses a reasonable offer of an appointment).

  

 Quarter Ending
No. Seen Within 26 Weeks
% Seen Within26 Weeks
Total Waiting TimesCases Seen


 June 2000
 218,970
 93.7
 233,620


 September 2000
 212,519
 93.9
 226,291


 December 2000
 220,457
 92.5
 238,416


 March 2001
 219,358
 91.4
 240,119


 June 2001
 213,416
 90.8
 235,043


 September 2001
 208,770
 90.8
 229,864


 December 2001
 213,837
 89.4
 239,194


 March 2002
 210,009
 88.2
 238,034


 June 2002
 207,336
 87.9
 235,780


 September 2002
 205,093
 87.9
 233,435


 December 2002
 207,141
 86.3
 240,159


 March 2003
 205,956
 85.8
 240,128


 June 2003
 194,599
 87.2
 223,210


 September 2003
 193,096
 88.0
 219,410


 December 2003
 195,990
 87.1
 225,015


 March 2004
 199,930
 86.0
 232,467


 June 2004
 189,651
 87.3
 217,241


 September 2004
 184,883
 87.1
 212,341


 December 2004
 193,967
 83.9
 231,291


 March 2005
 189,002
 81.5
 231,900


 June 2005P
 201,411
 88.5
 227,550


 September 2005P
 185,816
 90.9
 204,388


 December 2005P
 184,941
 90.0
 205,534



  Source: ISD SMR00.

  *Based on date referral received by hospital.

  PProvisional – these data may be incomplete. The figures relate to the number of records which were available for inclusion at the time of this analysis – this differs from the number of records available at the time of the Acute Hospital Care website publication. The actual number of cases seen may be higher. Additional records received later will be included in future updates of the percentage seen within 26 weeks figure on the website.

NHS Waiting Times

Mrs Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive, following the publication of Scottish Health Statistics – Acute Hospital Care on 23 February 2006, what the baseline figure is in respect of 90.5% of in-patients being admitted within six months in the quarter ending in December 2005.

Mr Andy Kerr: The figure was calculated from the total number of patients who were admitted to hospital from the in-patient/day case waiting list and who were discharged between 1 October 2005 and 31 December 2005. Of this total, 90.5% experienced a wait of six months or less between being added to the waiting list and being admitted to hospital. The calculation was based on SMR01 (in-patient and day case discharge summaries from non-obstetric, non-psychiatric specialties) data records submitted by hospitals and available for analysis for the quarter ending December 2005.

  At the time of the publication for the period in question, hospitals had submitted 55,072 SMR01 discharge records, of which 49,850 (90.5%) had recorded a wait of six months or less for admission. Additional records received later will be included in future routine analyses and updates of the website. The figures for the quarter ended 31 December 2005 are therefore provisional, as the web pages make clear.

  The information includes patients with an Availability Status Codes (ASC) – which records circumstances where the waiting time guarantee does not apply (for example, where the patient had asked to postpone their admission at some point after they were added to the waiting list, where at some point they were medically unfit for a planned procedure, or where they had failed to attend for their treatment). The recorded waiting times of patients with an ASC are therefore likely to overstate the period of time for which they were waiting and available for treatment. Patients with an ASC are excluded from the Executive’s in-patient and day case waiting time guarantee. The recording of ASCs on the SMR01 database is not mandatory and consistency of recording will vary across NHSScotland. ASCs cannot, therefore, be excluded from analyses of in-patient/day case waiting times.

  The SMR01 returns for the quarter ended 31 December 2005 do not record the number of patients who, on that date, were waiting more than six months for admission. A separate census of patients waiting at the quarter end date is taken and published. This is referred to as the in-patient/day case waiting list census and the relevant dataset is referred to as SMR3. SMR3 returns calculate waiting times from the date the patient was added to the waiting list to the census date. The SMR3 census for 31 December 2005 showed that, of patients who were still waiting at that date and who were covered by the in-patient and day case waiting times guarantee (that is, patients who did not have ASCs), two were waiting more than six months.

NHS Waiting Times

Mrs Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how many in-patients were treated within six months from GP referral in each quarter in each of the last five years, expressed also as a percentage of the total number of in-patients.

Mr Andy Kerr: The specific information requested is not readily available from central statistical returns. It is not currently possible to calculate the length of time that in-patients/day cases waited between GP referral and admission to hospital. However, information is available on the length of time that in-patients/day cases waited between the date they were placed on the waiting list and their date of admission.

  Table 1 shows the number and percentage of in-patients/day cases admitted within six months, from date placed on the waiting list to date of admission, for the last five financial years, broken down by quarter of discharge. The total number of in-patient/day case discharges in the period is also shown. All figures refer only to in-patients/day cases routinely admitted from home from the waiting list.

  The figures in the table include patients with an Availability Status Codes (ASC) – which records circumstances where the waiting time guarantee does not apply (for example, where the patient is medically unfit for a planned procedure). The recording of ASCs on the source database is not mandatory and consistency of recording will vary across NHSScotland. ASCs cannot, therefore, be excluded from analyses of in-patient/day case waiting times.

  Table 1: Number and Percentage of In-Patients and Day Cases Admitted within Six Months - Quarters Ending 30 June 2000 to 31 December 2005

  

 Discharged During Quarter Ended:
 Total Number of In-Patient and Day Case Discharges
 In-Patients and Day Cases Admitted within 6 Months


 Number of In-Patient and Day Case Discharges
 Percentage of Total In-Patient and Day Case Discharges


 Jun 2000
 117,046
 106,394
 90.9


 Sep 2000
 115,093
 103,682
 90.1


 Dec 2000
 117,107
 105,350
 90.0


 Mar 2001
 117,293
 105,753
 90.2


 Jun 2001
 108,406
 97,475
 89.9


 Sep 2001
 106,876
 95,261
 89.1


 Dec 2001
 108,865
 97,401
 89.5


 Mar 2002
 111,934
 99,838
 89.2


 Jun 2002
 101,561
 90,893
 89.5


 Sep 2002
 100,536
 89,294
 88.8


 Dec 2002
 102,379
 89,467
 87.4


 Mar 2003
 104,232
 89,888
 86.2


 Jun 2003
 99,460
 86,255
 86.7


 Sep 2003
 99,941
 86,044
 86.1


 Dec 2003
 102,610
 86,881
 84.7


 Mar 2004
 108,367
 92,666
 85.5


 Jun 2004
 102,975
 89,898
 87.3


 Sep 2004
 101,365
 87,914
 86.7


 Dec 2004
 102,714
 88,036
 85.7


 Mar 2005
 101,606
 87,351
 86.0


 Jun 2005p
 103,823
 92,752
 89.3


 Sep 2005p
 92,640
 83,867
 90.5


 Dec 2005p
 70,457
 63,762
 90.5



  Source: ISD SMR01.

  PProvisional – these data may be incomplete. The figures relate to the number of records which were available for inclusion at the time of this analysis – this differs from the number of records available at the time of the Acute Hospital Care website publication. The actual number of cases seen may be higher. Additional records received later will be included in future updates of the percentage seen within six months figure on the website.

NHS Waiting Times

Mrs Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive, following the publication of Scottish Health Statistics – Acute Hospital Care on 23 February 2006, what method it uses for recording the number of in-patient and day cases with a national waiting times guarantee.

Mr Andy Kerr: The number of in-patients and day cases with a guarantee is currently measured by a quarterly in-patient/day case Waiting List Census (SMR3). The census records each patient waiting and how long they have been waiting on the last day of March, June, September and December and whether they have an Availability Status Code (ASC). Patients without an ASC have a guaranteed maximum wait, but patients referred to obstetric, psychiatric and long stay sectors are specifically excluded. The census information is reported by each unified NHS board to ISD and the figures are reported on ISD’s website approximately seven weeks after the date of the census.

  Availability Status Codes can be applied in the following circumstances:

  ASC A: for patients with medical constraints that prevent admission for treatment

  ASC 2: where the patient has asked to defer admission for personal reasons or refused an offer of admission or an out-patient appointment has been rescheduled for his/her convenience

  ASC 3: in individual cases where, after discussion with the patient, the treatment has been judged of low medical priority

  ASC 4: for highly specialised treatments identified at time of placing the patient on a waiting list

  ASC 8: for patients who did not attend (DNAs)

  ASC 9: in the circumstances of exceptional strain on the NHS such as a major disaster, major epidemic or outbreak of infection, or service disruption by industrial action.

  Currently some 88 per cent of patients with an ASC have codes A, 2 and 8 and these situations are patient driven rather than NHS driven. I announced in December 2004 that ASCs will be abolished by 31 December 2007 and be replaced by a fairer and more transparent system. From 31 December 2007, patients will be treated within 18 weeks of being placed on the waiting list. Any periods of unavailability for treatment for medical, social or personal will be deducted from patients’ calculated waiting time. Patients who fail to attend or who refuse a reasonable offer of treatment may be referred back to the care of their GP.

Older People

Scott Barrie (Dunfermline West) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to develop the skills of the older members of Scotland’s workforce.

Allan Wilson: A new older learners programme - Experience Counts’ - will be available from today. This programme aims to improve the skills and learning capacity of older workers (age 50 and over) through encouraging Sector Skills Councils to collaborate with colleges and learning providers to develop and deliver bite size or taster courses aimed at the older worker within their sector. This programme will fund proposals aimed at improving the employability skills of older people currently in work and will deliver a total of £500,000 over the three financial years from 2005–08. Sector Skills Councils will now be invited to submit applications for this funding.

Planning

Mary Scanlon (Highlands and Islands) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how the Planning etc. (Scotland) Bill will affect the level of planning gain arising from the difference between current use value and planning value with full planning permission.

Malcolm Chisholm: We do not expect there to be any identifiable effect on land values, and consequently planning gain, as a consequence of the Planning Bill.

Planning

Mary Scanlon (Highlands and Islands) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether revenues collected by HM Treasury through planning gain supplement will be allocated to Scotland under separate arrangements to the current financial settlement under the Barnett formula.

Malcolm Chisholm: Discussions are on-going with HM Treasury on a number of aspects of the proposals for a planning gain supplement, including re-distribution of the revenues raised. No firm conclusions have yet been reached on what the most appropriate distribution mechanism would be.

Planning

Mary Scanlon (Highlands and Islands) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S2W-21459 by Malcolm Chisholm on 19 December 2005, whether planning gain supplement will be implemented in Scotland on the basis of a scaling-back of the scope of planning obligations under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Malcolm Chisholm: As part of the UK Government’s consultation paper on planning gain supplement, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has indicated that it will introduce regulations to scale back the scope of planning obligations in England under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The decision whether to adopt a similar approach to planning agreements and future obligations under section 75 of the Town and Country Planning Act (Scotland) 1997 is a devolved matter. We have not come to any conclusion on this, and will do so in the light of the consultation responses and further discussions with the UK Government on how planning gain supplement will be designed and implemented.

Planning

Murray Tosh (West of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S2W-21906 by Malcolm Chisholm on 24 January 2006, whether it was consulted in any way by HM Treasury before the announcement of proposals for a planning gain supplement and whether powers exist for Scottish ministers to distribute any revenues passed to it by HM Treasury, other than through the distribution mechanisms used to calculate the distribution of aggregated external finance, or to require that these revenues will be spent on infrastructure or other mitigation programmes related to the planning consents from which the proposed revenues will arise.

Malcolm Chisholm: The Scottish Executive has held general discussions with HM Treasury about the implications of the Barker Report, including the possible introduction of a Planning Gain Supplement (PGS). We were aware that the Chancellor’s Pre-Budget Report. would include an announcement of a consultation on PGS.

  Discussions are on-going with HM Treasury on a number of aspects of the proposals, including the re-distribution of revenues raised. We will consider the outcome of these discussions, as well as the views of Scottish stakeholders expressed in the consultation. Once there are further details on the likely level and proposed treatment of the revenues raised, we will consider the mechanisms that might be applied to their distribution in Scotland. This consideration will necessarily cover the powers needed to implement them. At this stage, however, it is too early to assess the availability of appropriate powers.

Public Private Partnerships

Linda Fabiani (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what measures it takes to enforce each of its PFI/PPP contracts; what the cost of these measures was in each of the last three financial years, and what it estimates the costs will be in each of the next 15 financial years at current prices.

Mr Tom McCabe: In each of the Executive’s PPP contracts management and monitoring has been conducted by and within Departmental units and separate costs for specific contract management are not readily available.

Public Private Partnerships

Linda Fabiani (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what information it has on measures taken by other Scottish public authorities to enforce their PFI/PPP contracts.

Linda Fabiani (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what information it has on the costs incurred by other Scottish public authorities in enforcing their PFI/PPP contracts.

Mr Tom McCabe: The enforcement of a PPP contract is a matter for the relevant public sector procuring body concerned.

Public Private Partnerships

Linda Fabiani (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what steps it has taken in respect of its own PFI/PPP contracts to ensure that the introduction of new technology requiring a change to infrastructure owned or leased by a PFI/PPP contractor does not cause the Executive to incur costs above the market rate for installation of such technology.

Linda Fabiani (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what recommendations it has made to public authorities in respect of their PFI/PPP contracts to ensure that the introduction of new technology requiring a change to infrastructure owned or leased by a PFI/PPP contractor does not cause the authorities to incur costs above the market rate for installation of such technology.

Linda Fabiani (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what steps it has taken to ensure that, where it makes a change in its policy requiring an adaptation to infrastructure owned or leased by a PFI/PPP contractor, such an adaptation does not cause the Executive to incur costs above those that it would incur if it were to make such an adaptation to non-PFI/PPP infrastructure.

Linda Fabiani (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what recommendations it has made to public authorities to ensure that, where such an authority makes a change in its policy requiring an adaptation to infrastructure owned or leased by a PFI/PPP contractor, such an adaptation does not cause the authority to incur costs above those that it would incur if it were to make such an adaptation to non-PFI/PPP infrastructure.

Mr Tom McCabe: The standard form of PPP contract reflects key principles and terms used for PPP projects in all sectors and is adopted as a standard throughout the UK. The standard form includes provision for a variation and for the variation to be brought about in accordance with prescribed change procedures.

  The cost of any such change would be negotiated at the time, and there is no reason why the cost of undertaking the physical works should not be at the market rate prevalent at the time. The risks associated with the change would also need to be assessed so that the PPP contractor can bear such responsibilities for the remainder of the contract period. These may affect the life-cycle PPP contract and the risk transfer to the contractor may alter from the original position at contract signature. This may or may not result in additional costs to the public sector body. In a conventional procurement situation the responsible public body would have to take account of similar long-term service and cost implications of the change also.

Public Private Partnerships

Linda Fabiani (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what action it is taking to encourage the involvement of small and medium-sized enterprises in PPP/PFI projects and private prison projects.

Mr Tom McCabe: The Infrastructure Investment Plan, which was published in February 2005, outlines the detail of the Executive’s investment plans by ministerial portfolio and confirms the major investment opportunities available within Scotland. This is the first such Plan  and it has been welcomed by industry, including small and medium-sized enterprises, as allowing them to improve their forward resource and tender plans. A copy of the plan can be found in the Scottish Parliament Information Centre (Bib. number 35376).

  PPP are advertised in accordance with EC Procurement Directives. PPP projects tend to be large projects requiring main contractors to have experience of organising large and complex work programmes, and requiring significant balance sheets. Therefore there is limited opportunity for small and medium-sized companies to become directly involved in the PPP consortium, although a few Scottish regional companies have successfully developed into that market. Many new opportunities across a wide range of services have been created at sub-contractor level under use of PPP in Scotland.

Public Private Partnerships

Linda Fabiani (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what information it has on the involvement to date of small and medium-sized enterprises in PPP/PFI projects and private prison projects.

Mr Tom McCabe: This is a matter for each public sector body procuring a PPP project. The information requested is not held centrally.

School Meals

Mr John Swinney (North Tayside) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what total public expenditure on school meals was in each year since 1999.

Peter Peacock: School meals are provided by individual local authorities. The total gross expenditure by local authorities on the provision of school meals in the years since 1999 is shown in the table below. This information is reported in the annual Local Government Finance Returns.

  

 Year
Gross Expenditure(£ Million)


 1999-2000
 96.7 


 2000-01
 91.4 


 2001-02
 94 


 2002-03
 93.6 


 2003-04
 98.9m 


 2004-05
 102.9



  Source: Local Financial Returns (LFR1).

  These figures include expenditure associated with implementing Hungry for Success recommendations.

Sex Education

Linda Fabiani (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what resources it is directing towards sex education in schools.

Peter Peacock: The development of sex and relationships education programmes, including specific teaching materials, is a matter for local authorities and schools. All schools are required to provide health education, including sex education, within the framework of Health Education 5-14 National Guidelines. Circular 2/2001 Standards in Scotland’s Schools etc. Act 2000: Conduct of Sex Education in Scottish Schools  sets out the framework for the development and delivery of sex and relationships education in Scotland.

  There are a number of continuing professional development (CPD) sex and relationships education courses available for teachers and as part of their contract, teachers are obliged to undertake 35 hours (CPD) each year.

  Healthy Respect, a National Health Demonstration Project on young people’s sexual health is funded by the Scottish Executive and hosted by NHS Lothian. It aims to demonstrate how increasing young people’s knowledge of sexual health issues through a multi-disciplinary approach to education, information and accessible services in a variety of settings can lead to improved sexual health and relationships. The learning from Healthy Respect will be shared across Scotland to enable other parts of the country to shape their own services according to local need.

  Healthy Respect and the Scottish Catholic Education Service are jointly supporting a project to develop appropriate sex and relationships education programmes in three Catholic secondary schools in Edinburgh and three in the West of Scotland. This project has been funded by the Scottish Executive (Health and Education Departments) over three years from 2005.

Sexual Health

Mary Scanlon (Highlands and Islands) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive what action is being taken to reduce the level of sexually transmitted infections.

Mr Andy Kerr: I refer the member to the answer question S2W-23504 on 6 March 2005. All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/webapp/wa.search .

Sexual Health

Mary Scanlon (Highlands and Islands) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how many people have been diagnosed with a sexually transmitted infection in each of the last five years, broken down by infection type.

Mr Andy Kerr: The information requested is not held centrally. Sexually transmitted infections (STI) are treated in a number of locations in addition to genitourinary medicine (GUM) clinics. These locations include family planning clinics and primary care settings. Data from these locations is incomplete and is not available by NHS board of residence.

  Data derived from GUM clinic attendances for acute and other STIs, broken down by infection type are available from the web on the Information and Statistics Division’s Scottish Health Statistics at http://www.isdscotland.org/isd/info3.jsp?pContentID=2051&p_applic=CCC&p_service=Content.show&

  This data is based on diagnoses.

  Laboratory data on the four main STIs, syphilis, gonorrhoea, chlamydia and genital herpes, are routinely collected by Health Protection Scotland (HPS). The number of positive laboratory reports for syphilis, gonorrhoea and genital herpes are very similar to diagnoses recorded at GUM clinics, but chlamydia, which is the most frequent single diagnosis in this age group, is more likely to be diagnosed in other settings. It is estimated that only 44% of chlamydia is diagnosed within GUM clinics. Laboratory data for 2000-04 can be obtained from Health Protection Scotland’s Weekly Report at http://www.show.scot.nhs.uk/scieh/PDF/pdf2005/0507.pdf.

Social Work

Tommy Sheridan (Glasgow) (SSP): To ask the Scottish Executive how the First Minister’s recent comments about a "lack of caring" and "stupidity" of social services staff will affect recruitment to social services departments across Scotland.

Peter Peacock: Social Service staff recruitment is buoyant and we expect that to continue.

Tartan Week

Chris Ballance (South of Scotland) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will provide a detailed breakdown of the public and private expenditure invested in Tartan Week and its activities and what mechanism is being used to analyse the return on this investment.

Mr Tom McCabe: The Scottish Executive budget for Tartan Week in 2006 is £660,000. This is made up of £560,000 in support for events around Tartan Week in New York and Washington DC and £100,000 on marketing. This expenditure is allocated from the Finance and Central Services Department budget. The Scottish Executive’s Analytical Services have developed a model for evaluating overseas events and programmes which looks at the planning, implementation and impact of events against their original objectives. This model sets out costs against outcomes for each year’s Tartan Week programme. The evaluation report for Tartan Week 2005 will be available later this month.